Casing the Courts

As we’re not all lawyers, nor Yale grads capable of deciphering political language and legalese, Michael Berube has published a very simple translation tool so the next time the President refers to historical law cases, you’ll know exactly what he means.

A Comparison of Integrity

I have witnessed much in the past 4 years but my memory is far longer than that. I remember politicians like Bobby Kennedy, whose brother Ted eulogized him with a famous poet’s quote that Bobby loved: “Some men see things as they are and ask why; others see how things could be and say ‘why not?’ “

I am torn between those two. I ask myself why people debate nuances in debate styles of the two candidates, but never seem to ask how America acquired the right to bomb to smithereens more than 10,000 people in Iraq when we’d already successfully disarmed Iraq. Just to get one guy, Saddam, who wanted power and prestige for himself, and someday, somehow, might have been able to become a threat again? That’s more than 10,000 people we killed! Not soldiers but civilians! Because of a ‘maybe, someday.’

And for this, we sanctioned detentions of soldiers without due process, in defiance of Geneva Conventions, tolerated torture and rape and sodomy of women and children, have lost 1,064 of our troops and have close to 30,000 damaged (oh, but the mentally ill don’t count as ‘wounded’ do they, so let’s shave that number down to 8,000).

What gave us the divine right? And where are our churchgoers about this warped morality?

Continue reading…

Waltzing Matilda won’t cut the rug here

As Robert Farley notes, the win of Howard in Australia has little bearing here. Besides the disparity in the size of the troop deployments, Australia’s economy is peaking. Even at that, Howard’s win was pretty close. Tony Blair and George Bush face judgments likely to be worse because neither has the pluses Howard enjoys.

But then there’s the downside…

I should have listened a bit longer. The sweetness of the Oregonian’s Kerry endorsement is tempered with a tang of sour. Public Editor Michael Arrieta-Walden explains explains how the decision was made, and then goes on to write:

As with any editorial opinion, Rowe says, the decision will have no effect on coverage in the news pages.

But it will affect letters to the editors and guest opinions chosen for publication. Letters supporting Kerry have been outnumbering those backing Bush by a ratio of more than 5-to-1. But Caldwell says the newspaper will give more weight to publishing opinions in favor of Bush, to counter the editorial endorsement.

Huh? I don’t get it. A 1-day endorsement followed by 3 weeks of artificially beefed-up Bush support. The reason the Oregonian’s letters run 5 to 1 in favor of Kerry is because that’s the proportion in which they receive them. I believe Arrieta-Walden has explained this before. But then, there’s an explanation for everything in this era of the Big Excuse.

Update:Public Editor Michael Arrieta-Walden responds:

I will share your views of the handling of the letters in light of the endorsement with other editors. I may have overstated the reaction of the editors, but the intent is to make sure that all opinions get aired on the opinion pages. The newspaper especially wants to make sure that occurs if the opinion is contrary to the newspaper’s.

I like this guy. I’ve written to him on several occasions, and he always responds immediately. Please don’t spam him.

Oregonian Endorsement

The endorsement editorial from the Portland Oregonian is up on the web.

Some key excerpts:

We believe the White House’s policy-makers approached the war with preconceived notions about success based on what the president later called “just guessing.” They brushed aside warnings and contrary opinions. They chose ideology over expertise. This arrogance led to a series of military, political and diplomatic blunders and, we believe, resulted in the unnecessary deaths of many brave Americans.

…In almost every area, deliberate gaps between the administration’s rhetoric and reality have become routine. Last year’s misinformation about the cost of Medicare drug coverage is just one example.

…on the international front, Kerry understands something that Bush does not: Our nation’s experience shows that strong international alliances are vital to erecting a bulwark against aggression, tyranny and terrorism.

…When George W. Bush took office in a deeply divided nation, he promised to reach out to unite the country. If anything, he has helped make the rifts deeper. That may be his real failure as president.

John Kerry can do better.

Music to my ears!

How the Dubya Got His Hump

Friday night I watched carefully for a bulge on the back of Bush’s jacket. I thought I saw one a few times, but since then I haven’t had time to go through the debate video looking for a frame to screen capture. So I thank Bob Fertik of Democrats.com for providing the tell-tale photo.

Major media, including the BBC and the New York Times, are starting to sniff around the jacket bulge issue.

Several State Roundup, plus the Bush Aces

–For an idea about what’s driving Carolina politics in regards to the Senate races, consider the economics of a cornerstone industry there, as it helps explain why Erskine Bowles and Inez Tenenbaum may win both seats for the Dems (a net pickup of one).

At this point, it looks like Kerry can’t touch SC, and NC remains a lonshot for him, but a net gain of one in the Senate means a tie where the next VP will hold the power.

–In Colorado, Kerry is tied with Bush. But since the ballot also contains a proportional electoral vote measure that seems likely to pass, the CO outcome is likely to award 5 votes to the winner and 4 to the loser, unless the courts invalidate the proportional measure.

In the Senate, though, Colorado Luis has rosy news about Salazar. This would be another pickup for the Dems, if it holds.

Continue reading…

Breaking…Oregonian to Endorse Kerry

We were cheering tonight when someone came in to say that the Portland Oregonian will endorse Kerry on its editorial page tomorrow. It is said that the editorial is very eloquent, but it hasn’t been posted on the web yet.

Four years ago, this is what they said:

But something else goes to the heart of our preference for Bush. To be successful, the next president must be more! than the sum of his views on the issues. He must have a talent for listening, setting priorities and he must be authentic.

During his tenure as governor, Bush has shown he can listen. He has been almost self-consciously bipartisan in Austin. His selection of a group of strong advisers – Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, foreign-affairs expert Condoleezza Rice, innovative Indianapolis mayor Stephen Goldsmith, Montana Gov. Marc Racicot – shows both moderation and a willingness to consider a wide range of views.

Tide’s turning!

Bush Turns Radio Address Into Campaign Ad

Another episode of News in the News …

This is from the President’s Radio Address, today:

And to make sure America is the best place in the world to do business and create jobs, we will cut regulations, end junk lawsuits, pass a sound energy policy and make tax relief permanent. Senator Kerry takes a very different approach to our economy. He was named the most liberal member of the United States Senate, and that’s a title he has earned. Over the past 20 years, Senator Kerry has voted to raise taxes 98 times. He opposed all our tax relief, and voted instead to squeeze an extra $2,000 in taxes from the average middle class family. Now he’s running on an agenda of higher taxes and higher spending and more government control over American life. My opponent wants to empower government. I want to use government to empower people.

Continue reading…

The net result: now get the shirt

Lynda B. at Available Light has the link to the shirt defining the last debate.

It captures the new buzz of the under-30 voter.

Why We Need the Fairness Doctrine in Media

The Sinclair media company is planning to air “Stolen Honor", an anti-Kerry movie by Carlton Sherwood, a former reporter for the Washington Times (a right-wing newspaper owned by the infamous Reverend Moon) just a short time before the November elections:

Station and network sources said they have been told the Sinclair stations — which include affiliates of Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC, as well as WB and UPN — will be preempting regular programming for one hour between Oct. 21 and Oct. 24, depending on the city. The airing of “Stolen Honor” will be followed by a panel discussion, which Kerry will be asked to join, thus potentially satisfying fairness regulations, the sources said.

Sinclair is not new to this kind of controversy:

The company made headlines in April when it ordered seven of its stations not to air Ted Koppel’s “Nightline” roll call of military dead in Iraq, deeming it a political statement “disguised as news content.” Sen. John McCain, the Republican from Arizona who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, was among those who criticized Sinclair’s decision not to air the “Nightline” program, which featured the names and pictures of more than 700 U.S. troops.

The so-called liberal media in action, once again…

Post-debate polls: Winner by a hair

USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll
Kerry 47%
Bush 45%
Tie 7%

ABC
Kerry 44%
Bush 41%
Tie 13%

Best debate analysis…

This time, Dave Pell’s thinking squares with my own, though he missed a couple of points I found important (Dred Scott and Kerry’s Missouri-based answers).

Be sure to click the ‘uh-oh’ link after his mention of Wonkette.

But can we bring these candidates to the level where the common rabble lives? Do either of these candidates know what a tank of gas costs these days? Daycare?

Here’s a softball question I’d ask George Bush: “Do you know what the minimum wage is? And… “Can you do the math and explain how people can afford necessities with a wage anywhere near that?” I bet he couldn’t even answer the first one.

Get to the level where the working class lives. Ask yourselves what will make an LPN or a sanitation worker or a short-order cook want what you have to offer. Then tie up your proposals into a universal theme that makes them say “Yeah!", that makes them say “I’d like an America like that.”

Kerry’s so close to it, I can feel it. But he’s gotta go the last mile to find it, to encapsule it, and make us want it.

Try us

Undecideds at the debate were impressed, but found little that shifted their opinion.

I still think it’s the vision thing. Other than attacking each other, neither side is opening themselves up to any grand summation of what America can be. Neither side is willing to say that the soldiers and their families are making all the sacrifices in these wars and in the quest to keep America safe and economically sound, it’s possible the rest of us will have to consider making a sacrifice or two.

Have we become such an entitlement society that the notion of sacrifice to aid our nation and its coming generations is beyond mention?

Create the appealling vision of where you’ll take us, Senator Kerry. And ask us to pitch in with work where necessary, and sacrifices that will surely be small next to those our troops are making.

Americans like inspiration and like to feel like they’re a necessary part of the solution. Try us.

Currie: Missouri “Back In Play” for Kerry

Teammate Chuck Currie was at the post debate rally and weighed in on the outcome. The money quote?

It was announced that the Kerry campaign – which had all but given up on Missouri – would start airing campaign commercials again here next week. That means this Midwest state is back in play.

Debate conclusion

Bush looked like a grownup tonight. This was a draw on performance.

On the factualness of their statements, however, Bush clearly lost. He misstated his Homeland Security spending, saying he tripled it when he didn’t quite double it. He never responded with specifics to key points Kerry made in several areas. One he never answers is about port security, which is exactly the way a nuclear bomb by terrorists would enter the country. Which is my major worry about terrorists.

Three big areas of difference: Bush completely misstated the Dred Scott decision and what it was about. Every Black American with a minimal knowledge of history will find offense in Bush’s claim that the judge interjected a personal opinion into it by treating blacks as property. The judge made it clear the decision was because blacks were Africans and had no rights.

The second was on the issue of stem cells and abortions. Bush defined himself the same way, selling himself to his base. Kerry took the opportunity provided to define his Catholicism, his opinions on a slew of family planning issues, why he voted against a couple of abortion modifiers (both were clearly flawed) in clear and certain terms. I think many more women will be shifting to Kerry because he demonstrated that those flawed bills didn’t protect women’s safety and women’s lives.

The third was provincial. Bush played to the audience and to the national audience. Kerry did, too, but he also had his facts in order over and over about Missouri. It showed he cared enough to do his homework about them, the people, which is more than a handshake and smile can do.

If judged on performance as showmanship, they both looked good and the debate was a tie. After fact checking and news quotes get read in Saturday papers, by Sunday or Monday the polls will clearly show that Kerry won.

Debate 2: Liveblog

Overall, this was the most engaging and interesting debate I’ve ever seen. Both men were very energized, rather good stylistically, and misleading. Kerry did well on not impersonating Jon Stewart’s impersonation of him as a dull and rather boring Joe “Joementum” Lieberman clone. Bush did well on hitting Kerry on campaign themes such as the $87 billion vote. As non-partisan as I can be, I think that Kerry won this one both on substance and on persuasiveness, although not as definitively as the first debate. Both men were extraordinarily weak in going for the jugular and using high-faluting rhetoric to denounce the others position as incompassionate and offensive to the common man. They mentioned it–but they were no Tim Ryan.

10:37pm – Bush closing statement. Bush is echoing a campaign ad going through the history of his administration: corporate scandals, recession, 9/11, tax cuts, Afghanistan, healthcare reform, jobs, energy plan that blows, and securing our nation. The theme of the closing is obviously leadership and more of the same if I’m re-elected. To Bush, the greatest threat to the world is hatorade–how can I disagree with that.

10:36pm – Kerry closing statement. It’s rather boring as it mentions alliances and plan multiple times. Kerry is going for all the points by going from Iraq, to the economy, the eduation system, and the environment. Very stale closing.

10:33pm – Bush follows through on my prediction, obviously, but does not follow through with it to the end by going off-message and talking about Saddam.

10:32pm – Kerry is not doing well on this question, although it is open for a crotch shot to Bush like no other. He continues his talk about coalition-building and whatnot while not attacking him on the areas named below. It’s getting better, however, as he is talking about the lack of armor for the soldiers and for the humvees, which will open him up to an attack on the $87 billion line.

10:31pm – Bush is questioned on mistakes. The questioner is making Bush angry. You won’t want to see him when he’s angry. Naturally, he is having a lot of trouble answering this question, but continues to assert that he is accountable for whatever mistakes he is not willing to admit. To him, mistakes have been made, but the little ones don’t matter only the big ones. He believes that going into Iraq was a good decision, but whether or not to disband the Iraqi army, to invade Fallujah, to take care of Sadr, to fix the intelligence community, to not alter the tax cut, to not respect fiscal discipline are simply irrelevant. Of course, he doesn’t name any mistakes, completely ignoring the question.

Continue reading…

Debate 2 Intro

As I watch the various networks for my pre-debate update, one thing is incredibly striking–it is as if Bush supporters have had the wind knocked out of them with a sledge hammer to the gut. While I had declared John Kerry the undisputed winner of the first debate, I did not expect it to have such a large impact on the electorate. Polls before and after show that the consequences of an hour and a half of prime time television greatly surpassed what either campaigns were able to accomplish with their plastic made-for-television party conventions. A rather stunning combination of mediocrity and, at times, brilliance from John Kerry coupled with a stumbling, bumbling, flip-fumbling, jingling, dingling, evangelical-Christian-mingling performance by our commander-in-chief served the essential purpose of contrast, which in light of media manipulation by Republicans and media-manipulating impotence by Democrats, was a breath of fresh air.

While today’s debate is unlikely to have the same impact as the first one, as it is forced to compete with MLB playoffs, permiscuity, ladies’ night, and happy hour across the country, it will certainly continue the momentum shift that began during the middle of last week, solidifying Kerry’s recent surge. On a normal day, I would present the shear futility of Bush’s position and execution on issues such as poverty, the economy, tax cuts, the energy industry, shafting children, and free trade, or even his plans for the future, but I don’t see the point. If the first debate showed anything, it was that outside his coccoon, Dear Leader is unable to withstand semi-serious scrutiny resorting to Jenna-type facial musings to get his point across.

Live-blogging will commence at 9:00pm.

Sixty-year-old fratboys

I’ve always admired fratboys–not for their education, but because of their ability to add a sense of importance to the silliest practices. Who else can make lying drunk in a puddle of puke seem like the ultimate college experience. They are able to accomplish this because they are born leaders, men so secure in their righteous arrogance that no one dares wonder aloud if there is any “there,” there. As consumers who prefer style over substance, we follow them without question.

Continue reading…

Debating For Dummies

While surfing the ‘Net, I came across a Very Important Fact That Everyone Should Know About. Apparently, the United States of America is holding an election very soon, and it’s for, get this, the PRESIDENCY! Not only that, but the candidates will be on television … TONIGHT! I also noticed that quite a few people are doing pre-debate predictions, and because I strive to be Just Like Everyone Else, I came up with a few of my own.

1) Someone will lie. Oh, yes, they will, and often. Ordinarily, I consider lying to be a bad thing, but this is for the Presidency, pal, the gloves are off! I mean, in all honesty, what other job can you say words like ‘Haliburton’ and ‘Filibuster’ on a regular basis, and not be laughed at?

2) Someone will come across as cool, collected and intelligent. The other one will come across like Grover from Sesame Street on acid. This is determined by a large number of factors, such as what political camp you belong to, and whether you have ever worked for Fox News.

3) Scooby and the gang will pop up, pull off someone’s mask and announce that he is not really a Presidential candidate, but really Old Man Wankers from the glue factory.

4) There will also be some discussion about Important Issues, such as the war, Iraq, and that there is currently a war being fought in Iraq, which clearly means that the other guy should not be elected, but should, in fact, be taken out and beaten with sticks.

5) There will be no discussion about Really Important Issues, such as why Paris Hilton is allowed to operate a motorized vehicle, and why Celine Dion is allowed to remain in the United States.
Continue reading…

Time for Bush to Detox?

George W. Bush may fail to appear at Friday evening’s debate after checking into a power detoxification clinic. Bush was confronted Friday afternoon with an intercession by his family — his father, mother and brothers — and former political allies who believe he and Dick Cheney may have misunderstood their 2000 election “mandate.”
“Perhaps looking at the popular vote defeat in 2000 as a mandate for your agenda might not have been prudent at this juncture,” said former President George H. W. Bush, in joining an intercession with his son at the Oval Office. “At least you had the sense not to deliver any new taxes.”
The younger Bush was surrounded by many of his former top advisers, led by Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Treasury Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neal, and former National Security Advisor Richard Clarke, as well as Chicago Cubs slugger Sammy Sosa. “It’s time to put a cork into your bat,” Sosa advised the son of the man who emancipated him from the Texas Rangers. “Your coming up to bat in the ninth inning on November 2, and right now, it looks like you’re going to have a very long winter in Crawford without a newspaper subscription.”
Jeb Bush warned his brother that Florida might be going South in this election. “People are beginning to remember that they were never hit by as many hurricanes when Clinton was President.”
But it was Clarke who drew first fire from the commander-in-chief. “Good grief, Dick, after all these years since your memos, you never put out the fire in your hair?”
“I still believe that America should be on red alert,” Clarke responded. Continue reading…

An end to the conflict means the next awaits

Texas. Arkansas. Texas. Southern California. Georgia. Southern California. Texas.

Anyone see a pattern here? Any idea what the next three in the sequence are?

Massachusetts, sort of. Kansas. Missouri.

Perhaps this will explain it better:

Continue reading…

Latest Tennessee Poll

Knoxville TV station WBIR reported a statewide SurveyUSA poll last night (which is curiously not on their web site or in the local paper) that shows Bush ahead by 19 points in Tennessee, 58% to 39%.

According to the poll taken between 10/3 and 10/5, Kerry leads by 2 points in West Tennessee, Bush leads by 23 points in Middle Tennessee and by 30 points in East Tennessee. Bush is up 5 points overall from the previous SurveyUSA poll taken 9/20-9/22. This is the strongest lead for Bush to date in Tennessee.

SurveyUSA uses an automated telephone polling system with pre-recorded announcers and randomly sampled telephone numbers. The poll was contracted by WBIR.

That Middle Tennessee number seems a little suspect to me. In fact, the entire poll seems suspect. Unfortunately, though, the final SurveyUSA poll for the Governor’s race on 10/28/2002 correctly predicted a win for Democrat Phil Bredesen.

On the bright side, SurveyUSA significantly under polled Democrats (and maybe independents) in the 2002 governor’s race. Their final poll showed Bredesen 48% to 44%. The final result was Bredesen 55% to 44%. Hopefully they are under polling Democrats in this case, too, but either way a 19 point lead is a pretty tough row to hoe for Kerry.

Maybe Kerry has seen these numbers and that’s why he won’t campaign here. Or maybe these numbers reflect the fact that he won’t campaign here. Who knows? Anyway, we need to work harder and do whatever we can here in Tennessee but I’m beginning to wonder if us Tennessee Democrats shouldn’t pack up and go help in Ohio or Pennsylvania or Florida.

At one point Tennessee was in play. We have gone from basically tied (exactly tied in a July Zogby/WSJ poll) to this. I don’t know what happened. I know that Tennessee Democrats are working hard and the level of enthusiasm is high. There are Kerry/Edwards signs all over Knox County and Blount County here in GOP stronghold East Tennessee, including all the major highways going in and out of Knoxville. I see very few Bush/Cheney signs on the highways. Turnout has been good at Kerry/Edwards rallies and events. Kerry/Edwards campaign voter registration drives are producing record numbers of new voters. Democrats in Blount and Knox counties are as organized as I have ever seen them for a presidential election.

On the other hand, the Blount Co. Kerry/Edwards campaign chair told me the local Democratic party organization is MIA. We seem to be getting little support from them, at either the state or local level. Even our Governor, Democrat Phil Bredesen, appears to be sitting this one out. Curiously, we’re not hearing much from him in support of Kerry. The DNC is helping out, but I have heard that the Kerry/Edwards campaign has been slow to get campaign swag and other support to the local offices here.

Moreover, Republicans are highly organized and running like a well-oiled machine. They get anything they need and are flush with GOP cash. Here in East Tennessee the mayors of Knoxville and Knox County and all the big money players are strong Bush supporters and have the party organization in line. Bush has been to Tennessee at least five times for fundraising and campaign events disguised as official visits (so the taxpayers can foot the bill).

Despite all this, I think Democrats will make a better showing than this latest poll suggests. We are as energized and organized as I can remember. Hopefully it will be enough, but either way we aren’t going down without a fight.

OK, then.

MAJOR UPDATE: Much better news here. The latest Zogby/WSJ poll for Oct. 6th (yesterday) of 983 respondents has it Bush 48.7% and Kerry 47.8%, which is a tie. Let’s hope this one is more accurate.

Good News from PA

In the latest survey of 594 registered voters released late Wednesday, Kerry jumped in front of Bush by 48 percent to 41 percent. Independent candidate Ralph Nader received 3 percent, and 8 percent of respondents said they were undecided. The survey, conducted between Sept. 30 and Monday by Franklin and Marshall College’s Center for Opinion Research in Lancaster County, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The race is slightly tighter among likely voters, with Kerry ahead by 49 percent to 43 percent.

There’s more good news than that:

About 15 percent of the respondents are military veterans, and a majority of them appear to be breaking for Kerry. Of the veterans surveyed, 53 percent said they will vote for Kerry, compared to 39 percent for Bush. That’s a reversal from last month’s poll in which Bush led Kerry among veterans by a margin of 13 percentage points.

Continue reading…

McGreevy Covers the Debate

Joyce’s take on the Sunshine Senator vs. the Veep of Creep. A great read. Sit through the ad, or better yet, buy a subscription to Salon. They’re on our side.

The man known as “only a heartbeat and a jumpstart” away from the presidency called Democratic Sen. John Edwards to account for his impertinent truth-telling Tuesday evening in a debate at Case Western University.

…Throughout the 90-minute debate, Cheney drew on his long experience, carpet-bombing the proceedings with magnificent mendacity. Whether claiming never to have met John Edwards or denying that he had frequently made a false connection between Iraq and September 11, the front end of the Cheney-Bush racehorse was out to show that he could have his yellowcake and delete it too.

Lies and the Lying Liar …

“Dick Cheney spent 90 minutes lying.” – Don Imus on MSNBC this morning.

Last night the MSNBC pundit crew was spinning a Cheney victory, but this morning Imus was putting that to rest. Not that he was crazy about Edwards, either. But the central message was: Cheney lied. About everything. Continue reading…

Did Cheney Break the Law on 9-11?

In its November issue (obtained by War Room), the magazine reports that after Bush and Cheney’s all but hermetically sealed session with the 9/11 Commission, some of the bipartisan investigators remained highly skeptical of the duo’s testimony that Cheney cleared his order with the president on 9/11 to have U.S. fighter jets shoot down hijacked civilian aircraft.

“Some members of the 9/11 commission and its staff are convinced that Cheney acted on his own – before receiving the president’s approval – which would mean he broke the chain of command and, by exceeding his constitutional powers, acted unlawfully,” the story says. “The final report of the 9/11 commission stops just short of saying that the conversation with the president before Cheney gave the order never happened … the report goes as far as to say ‘there is no documentary evidence for this call …’ Only after Cheney twice issued a shootdown order is there clear evidence that he called Bush and received authorization to order fighter jets to shoot down hijacked aircraft.”

As one commission member told Vanity Fair on condition of anonymity, the panel was concerned about how to handle the politically explosive issue: “We purposely did not reach a conclusion. We just laid it out. Some people may read what we wrote and conclude the authorization call had not preceded the [shootdown] order. People can come to their own conclusion. We didn’t want to be in the position of saying the president and the vice president were lying to us.”

I guess it all depends on who really is the President.

As near as I can tell, President Gore should have made the call.

Isn’t it just peachy that neither Bush and Cheney made the calls to go after Bin Laden before 9-11, never took out Zarqawi when they had the chance, yet Cheney was apparently willing to break the law to shoot down a US passenger jet because he didn’t want to interrupt the boss’ reading of My Pet Goat.

No proof, but plenty of evidence. Sorta like Ken Lay’s Enron story so far. It makes for a great campaign slogan:

Bush/Cheney 2004: You Ain’t Proved Nuthin’ Copper!

And why not? It got Nixon re-elected.

CBS poll is more meaningful

It used uncommitted voters, not partisans. The undecided will be the ones who decide it. Here’s what the CBS poll showed:

Continue reading…

Talking points I missed

Events caused me to miss about 20% of the debate, but I’m glad to see Paul Begala recorded two biggies I missed:

Posted: 10:27 p.m.

Gwen Ifill just asked Cheney to talk about AIDS in America.

She specifically asked Cheney not to talk about AIDS overseas. But all Cheney’s talking about is AIDS overseas. He hasn’t been programmed on it, and candidly told Gwen he didn’t know about how African-American women have been hurt by the disease.

Posted: 10:20 p.m.

Edwards is going into the details of his own med mal reform. He’s now telling the story of the little girl who was disemboweled because a dirtbag corporation could’ve prevented it with a two-cent screw.

But why didn’t Edwards point out that it takes a lot of nerve for Bush and Cheney to want to limit anyone’s right to sue, when the only reason they’re in office is because they won a lawsuit.

They lost the vote but won the lawsuit. Now they want to keep consumers from defending their rights. You can bet they don’t want to limit the rights of politicians to sue to block recounts in Florida.

Jessi Klein’s take was funnier.

And Tucker Carlson? He blogs like, well, like it hurts to touch the keyboard, never revealing if somewhere beyond the hairspray, he ever met a personality that he could acquire.

But Begala’s points deserve to be noted by the Kerry campaign.

Also, I note that Elizabeth Edwards confronted Cheney onstage to point out two previous times they’d met, including one where they’d sat together for two hours. That spells trouble for Cheney in the afterspin. And people were worried about what Theresa might say!

The other George is coming

You’ll never guess what had some Wall Streeters ecstatic today.

George Soros began a speaking tour that will hit six swing states, combined with an ad campaign that will hit twelve.

As well, you can visit his blog to see the message he’s mailing to two million voters.

His first visit, to Pittsburgh, went pretty well.

The speech coincided with two-page advertisements in major newspapers, including the Post-Gazette and its Web site, in which Soros lays out his case against Bush. The long version is in his latest book, “The Bubble of American Supremacy: The Costs of Bush’s War in Iraq.”

It also came on a day when a company memo to investors announced that Soros was handing over greater control of his $12.8 billion, New York-based money management firm to his two sons and spinning off his real estate, credit and buyout units. Soros’ firm, started in 1973, oversaw more than $20 billion in the 1990s when it ranked as the world’s largest hedge fund.

Soros conceded that his wealth, estimated at $7 billion, enabled him to speak with a loud voice.

But according to Soros, he’s not alone. Several Wall Streeters who saw his advertisement in the Wall Street Journal “called me in rather ecstatic terms,” he said.

“I’m basically trying to reach moderate Republican business audiences,” Soros said.

Cheney’s Concern for Coalition Casualties

During the debate (here’s the transcript part 1, part 2), Dick Cheney disputed Edward’s contention that the American troops are carrying the 90% of the coalition casualties in Iraq. “Not so!", said the VP.

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they’ve taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S. with 50 percent, not 90 percent.

Does that mean the Bush administration is tracking Iraqi casualties? Or is this just another lie from the man who lied about never meeting John Edwards before the debate?

Debate Wrap

Update: Dave Pell has some excellent points. With Cheney delinking Iraq from 9-11 officially, that could move many Americans who believe in the linkage away from Bush. (I’m not sure; if Cheney said there are no UFOs, would it change many minds of the convinced?)

That the picture of Cheney meeting Edwards previously will be all over the news tomorrow could end up drowning out all other points in the debate, making Cheney out to be an EASILY proven liar. Combined with the points that Edwards registered on Halliburton (per undecided voters polled by CBS), a proven liar and war profiteer is not likely to be declared a winner.

Now, back to my original post, my original response, wrong as it may be in light of the post-debate developments. Though I still believe Kerry could do better, as noted in my concluding statements, even if my debate assessment doesn’t match yours.

1) I felt both candidates were too evasive on too many questions. There were some softballs that should have been hit.

2) There were a number of points where Cheney completely ignored charges Edwards levelled. He didn’t defend all his wrong votes in Congress: Head Start, Martin Luther King holiday, sanctions against South Africa that overturned apartheid, and more. His defense of Halliburton was a non-defense, simply saying that the claims wouldn’t hold up, though some of them - like withheld payments that should be happening but aren’t - are very, very visible. And his only defense of the economy was to mention that they’ve had some success in the past year, (after three years of complete failure and neglect!)

Continue reading…

Veep Debate Update

Unfortunately, I did not post an introduction to this debate as I did to last Thursday’s debate between President Bush and Senator Kerry. The reason being–I don’t really care about the vice president. While this administration uses him as a foreign policy advisor, an attack dog, a lobbyist, and an intelligence manipulator, his position as vice president is, for the most part, insignificant. Thus far, it is proving as much.

While Cheney is sticking to his message–essentially misrepresenting facts, lying about his past positions and the positions of others, and maintaining a heart rate below 30–John Edwards has been kept on the defensive, spending most of his time refuting the obvious distortions in Cheney’s statements. This has resulted in him not striking on many of Cheney’s catch-phrases that are loaded with attack material. Mr. Cheney says that he does not appreciate Kerry/Edwards demeaning the sacrifices of our allies, and their contributions in the war in Iraq (he also misstated the actual financial contributions by those countries, but let’s not meddle in mistakes of a piddly amount like 10’s of billions of dollars), but Edwards has thus far responded by only mentioning the lack of a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. A proper response would be:

The vice president accuses Senator Kerry and myself of demeaning our allies, an obvious misstatement that is reminiscent of his typical rhetoric on the subject. But I ask you Mr. Cheney, what does it say to our allies when we do not put our best foot forward, when we do not do our own part to provide the troops necessary, the funding necessary, the plan necessary, and the leadership necessary to acheive the peace, to succeed in our mission, and to stabilize that troublesome region of the world? What does it say to our troops when we send 40,000 of them thousands of miles away into harms way without the body armor and the equipment that is required for their safe return home to their families?

Such statements have been typical thus far.

Continue reading…

More on Bremer vs. the Godfather of the Iraq War

While I don’t even like to concede the possibility that George Bush might ever win a race outside of Texas, it’s still instructive to consider what would happen next. Colin Powell will leave. And many insiders are hoping Paul Bremer will take over.

Could his recent pronouncements be his effort to regain his credibility and boost his chances?

Don’t scoff and don’t gag. Because the alternative would be immeasurably worse. And the White House stonewalling about Bremer’s remarks is a sign that the alternative is their first choice

Here’s the red alert on the favored next Secretary of State. Paul Wolfowitz, a real swell spit-combing guy. Favored by whom? Dick Cheney, for one, and Rumsfeld, the real architects of the excellent Bush foreign policy misadventures.

Now Bremer clearly asked for more troops. So did the Pentagon, before the war started. Donald Rumsfeld and Cheney wanted less. Hell, Rummy was pushing for cuts in B-1 bombers and a downsizing of military manpower one month before the 9-11 attacks.

Continue reading…

Debate Preview

Polling indicates both Cheney and Edwards have favorable ratings in the mid-forties. Cheney’s unfavorable rating’s roughly the same.

Edwards, though, has a much lower unfavorable rating, partly because he’s the least known of the four guys on the big tickets. Going into the debate, then, Edwards has the most to lose. Considering a conservative core of diehard supporters at around 30%, there’s just not much room for Cheney’s negatives to get worse.

Edwards thus has the formidable task of holding the line. A tie tonight is a win, no matter how the yapping pit-chihuahuas of the Third Right spin it. And if he somehow increases his favorable ratings without losing his low 28% disapproval rate, his win will be astounding.

The clues being dropped by the Democratic Party in the past two days indicate it may be Edwards that brings Cheney an October surprise tonight. For old skeptics like me, who believe Cheney is the real architect of Bush’s FUBAR Doctrine, I can only say I hope the Party hierarchy isn’t toying with my affections. But if Edwards succeeds in toppling Cheney in tonight’s debate, I’ll gladly vote twice to ensure a Kerry win.

President Petulant

Dan Froomkin covers the White House for the Washington Post. His roundup of press commentary on the Beloved Leader’s crash-and-burn performance Thursday quotes a number of people making the point that the bullying, childishly irritable Bush the country saw on Thursday was the real, normal Bush that the people who work for him see all the time. (Karl Rove is even quoted as saying that Bush’s performance doesn’t really count as irritable – for Bush.)

The genial, aw-shucks, let-me-pray-and-cry-with-you Bush is the illusion, with no more substance than the million-dollar stage-set “ranch” the thoroughly suburban Bush bought just a year before he ran for President. That persona has been carefully protected by keeping GWB away from any situation in which he might be asked a hostile question, such as whether he still believes that America can’t win the war on terror. But it shattered like glass when Bush was confronted with someone who dealt with him as an equal rather than as royalty.

Now Bush’s problem, and Bush’s handlers’ problem, is whether that persona can be glued back together well enough to last the three hours of the last two debates. If the real Bush insists on reappearing, he’s probably toast November 2.

Ahhh! Real Issues!

“Every child in America will receive health care from day one if John is elected. Period,” she said.

The Kerry health care plan also will provide catastrophic coverage for all Americans, Heinz Kerry said. Under her husband’s plan, the government would pay 75 percent of all medical costs above $50,000 per incident, she said.

The Kerry plan also would provide tax subsidies to business owners to provide health insurance for their employees, she said.

In addition, her husband plans to provide every student in America with four years of college tuition in exchange for two years of community service, and to provide parents with a $4,000 tax credit for college tuition they pay, Heinz Kerry said.

How many Americans know this yet? Not enough, I bet.

The US Latrine Core…

… says it could be a Bush wipe-out, per Steve of No More Mister Nice Blog.

Pretty Boys and Pitbulls, Beyond Debate

Heading into the Tuesday debate between the vice-presidential nominees, some assume Edwards will outshine Cheney because he’s a happy Irish setter and Cheney’s a growly bulldog. Others warn against that aesthetic, reminding us that Cheney’s got a mind as sharp as a whip and regularly uses it on his field slaves.

But I say people don’t vote for Vice Presidents; if they show up and a pulse is detected, that’s good enough for America. I’ve obtained physical evidence from a reliable source that conclusively demonstrates that Republican Party leaders agree the bar should be set that low.

Continue reading…

The Anti-Doomsday Plank the Press Forgot

Bush: “The A.Q. Khan network has been brought to justice.” Actually, Khan was pardoned after making a confession that he did it all, without anyone in the government knowing anything about it and…and here’s the part everyone always leaves out…he was allowed to keep all the money he made!

(from Whatever It Is, I’m Against It)

Which brings up a major point Kerry mentioned, which the media’s chosen to ignore, that ending nuclear proliferation will be a cornerstone of Kerry’s defense policies. So what does that mean?

Consider this simple explanation of the threat:

Continue reading…